Winston Wolf

Decent day today at Rock Falls Raceway in WI. Working a few trans bugs out yet. It still wanted to short shift out of first. I did mangage to fix the problem by way overfilling the oil level. The g-forces are great enough, pushing all the oil to the back of the transmisison that the filter must be sucking air at the top of first. When the valve body see's the reduction in pressure, it forces an upshift. I have a filter setup that is suppose to prevent this, but I will need to make a custom pickup/filter this winter. Had 2 runs where I lost traction right off the line. Felt like the trans broke, scared the death out of me. Looks like I found the limit of the 9x28x15 slicks and will need to get wider ones. To sum it up, best time of the day was a 11.793 @ 117.21 mph. Looks like the engine is making enough HP now, I just need to get the power to the pavement. Keep in mind I am running original stock springs all around, with stock front shocks, air shocks in the back, and 3" rear coil spacers. I put together a video of some of todays runs to show how things went. Also, here you can see a log from one of the runs. From this you can tell alot. I am holding the foot brake at 1370 RPMs before I take off. Where the sharp rise line breaks is when the converter tightens up, around 3700. Then the 1-2 shift at 6400, the 2-3 shift at 6420, the lock up clutch engaging at 5520, and coming through the traps at about 6600 RPM's. You can see I have the fuel (AFR) dialed in at the mid 12:1 range, right where it should be. I use these to help me dial the car in. Easy to monitor jetting and shift RPM's. It allows you to go back and look at anything strange that happen's too. I knew for sure I was having the early shifting trans problem by checking my logs. A nice tool.

Sounds like it needs to be timed, along with adjusting the carb. Use a vacuum gauge to set the idle mixture. Download the manual from Edelbrock and do exactly what it says to do.

Tell me the model number stamped on the fron of the carb and I'll tell you how to make it work. And you need to install a fuel pressure gauge if you don't have one already.

Is this a new carb? Have you set the float levels?

My engine pulls 8" in gear, 12ish" in park. My brakes work just fine. You need to run the engine in the car to really see. I would try it as is, with the cam he had in it. You're going from a small block, so it probably still has more low end torque than you had before. To much torque isn't that functional on the steet anyways. I have found I can't even floor my car in 1st or 2nd gear without spinning the tires. It's fun if you want to show off, but not really that practical for much else. If it were me, I'd install it and take it to the track. See what kind of 60ft's and times you are getting, then make a decision. A cam change in the car isn't that bad, if it's even needed. People seem to get so scared of a "big cam". Try it, you might like it.

There is a HUGE difference between 430 HP and 600 HP. I hope it puts out a bunch of power for him, but 600 horse in a 414" engine ain't as easy as people think. Most guys in that range are using 500+ inch big blocks. Not to be a negative Nancy, but let's be Robbie realistic. I'm going off my experience with my engine. He has 5 cubic inches more than me. I would not say his heads are any better than mine, we have the same size carb from the same place. Around the same compression. Now granted, I haven't had mine on the engine dyno, only a chassis, but lets say a 20% dt loss, what would put mine at 482 the last time I dyno'd. I did change carb, intake rocker ratio and intake since then. It picked up a couple MPH, so lets say it's at 500 now. He does have a bigger cam,(mine is a solid too) but 100 HP with just a cam change is a bunch.... I guess we'll see. And to get to 600, your gonna have to wind the snot out of that mofo.

Brought the car in to get the exhaust fixed up. It was tweeked a bit more than I had thought, the passenger side was pretty bent. Took longer so naturally cost more than I had hoped. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure...this driveshaft breaking ended up costing me just over $2000 and probably 30 hours of my time. That does include the cost of beefing up the axles and studs, which should have been done anyways. It will be off the the track next weekend to keep tuning sans any issues this weekend. I still haven't changed a jet on the carb.... Here's the exhaust work from today.

yeah, maybe with a blower...... not to be a pessimist.

Go to post #265427 - 06/03/10 Fuel Pump

Car is back on the road. New trans in in and working like it should. I am getting a resonance that I believe is through the crunched up exhaust, so I'll be taking it in to have new mufflers put on and everything straightened up. The Dynotech driveshaft arrived as promised and the 1350 joints should be a plus. I went with a 2" x 1/2" screw in studs that work perfect. Here are a few pics of the new stuff. I also ended up changing out the front studs to make them legal. I did a seperate thread to show how it's done. Front Stud Swap

Thanks for the first hand post, that's exactly what I an betting on will happen here.....unfortunately.

I'll guess 530 HP 515 TQ and it's done making power at 6600.

I honestly wouldn't do it. You could damage the rear crank bearing, the trans pump, the converter, flexplate or all of them. It won't matter if you spin it 6000 or 3000. And just because it's on the street doesn't mean it won't break. A little trip to the gas station can take as long as a whole days worth of run time on a dragstrip.

I'd take that converter back to where I got it from and get a new one then.

I just went through this same thing. I ended up going with some beefed up Strange C-clip style axles. The eliminators involve cutting the ends off your rear end, and that wasn't something I wanted to do. You can see below that the axles are quite a bit beefier than the stock ones throughout the full length. A kit with Axles, Bearings, and seals was only $225. I did go with 1/2" screw in studs, I don't like pressing them in. 12 bolt axles Screw in studs I did not go with Moser axles because it looked like the hub flanges were slightly thicker, and my tire clearance is very tight. The 2" long studs were the exact length I needed to be NHRA legal with Cragar SS wheels. I don't like them sticking way out through the lug nuts. For what it's worth, my car ran times quicker than in your signature for the last 15 years and I didn't have any axle problems with the stock ones and slicks. I've since broken everything else, and figured they would be next.

Something seems fishy here. The flexplate and the torque converter should be perfectly perpendicular to one another. Are you sayting they are not? When checking how they mount up together, I have always gone by this: "The best way to be absolutely certain that the converter is fully indexed into the front pump is to place the transmission/converter assembly up against the back of the engine. The bolt lugs on the converter should not be touching the flex plate. There should be a gap between the flex plate and the converter bolt lugs. With the transmission bolted to the engine, this gap should be approximately 3/16” but no more than ¼”. (If the gap is larger than ¼”, precision shims must be installed to obtain the proper gap before the converter bolts are installed.). Before installing the bolts into the converter lugs you will need to slide the converter forward to the flex plate. If a gap doesn’t exist, the converter isn’t indexed into the pump properly. To get it to index into the pump, you need to continue turning the converter, at the same time, applying slightly inward pressure until it fully engages. Another easy way to check when using a full size converter is to try and slide your fingers between the converter and the pump housing. If you can, the converter isn’t fully engaged. This test doesn’t apply to the smaller v-6 or small diameter high stall converters." I have had to get hardened washers and put them between the converter and the flexplate, but I'm not fully understanding what you did???

I'll guess 530 HP 515 TQ

Hope it solves your problem! I've never had good luck with ported vacuum working right, so I've never used it, despite what Edelbrock recommends. When you set the idle mixture as I suggested in your other post, make sure you are reading off the manifold vacuum (tee in to the line with your gauge). I'm sure once you get the carb adjusted and the timing set correctly, you will have the car running great. I always set the timing to a total number, and then setup my distributor to get a good curve. I think with my vacuum advance I'm running 47 degrees total above 2000 rpms and high vacuum, so the vacuum advance only adds 10 degrees for my setup. But that makes a big difference.

+1

It's not the secondaries, you can't adjust them anyways so forget about that. Adjust your idle mixture screw to highest vacuum first. See if that solves the problem. If not, next try a bigger pump squirt by moving the accel pump rod a knotch. If that still doesn't work, you may need to look at your step up springs. A properly tuned Edelbrock WILL run awesome with no stumbles or bogs.

I have a 1/16th" hole drilled at the top side of the cap. I did have issues with venting before that. Too big of a hole and it will leak under heavy acceleration.

If the idle circuit jetting and overall distributor settings aren't optimal, people often times eliminate the vacuum advance to allow at smaller advance curve. They would just use mechanical advance and set it to a total timing number, say 36 degrees. They can then advance the distributor and get a cleaner/better idle while still limiting the total timing to 36 degrees. I would not do this on a street car and it's not necessary with a properly set up distributor. Here is a good writing on vacuum advance borrowed from another forum. ------------------------------------------------------------- As many of you are aware, timing and vacuum advance is one of my favorite subjects, as I was involved in the development of some of those systems in my GM days and I understand it. Many people don't, as there has been very little written about it anywhere that makes sense, and as a result, a lot of folks are under the misunderstanding that vacuum advance somehow compromises performance. Nothing could be further from the truth. I finally sat down the other day and wrote up a primer on the subject, with the objective of helping more folks to understand vacuum advance and how it works together with initial timing and centrifugal advance to optimize all-around operation and performance. I have this as a Word document if anyone wants it sent to them - I've cut-and-pasted it here; it's long, but hopefully it's also informative. TIMING AND VACUUM ADVANCE 101 The most important concept to understand is that lean mixtures, such as at idle and steady highway cruise, take longer to burn than rich mixtures; idle in particular, as idle mixture is affected by exhaust gas dilution. This requires that lean mixtures have "the fire lit" earlier in the compression cycle (spark timing advanced), allowing more burn time so that peak cylinder pressure is reached just after TDC for peak efficiency and reduced exhaust gas temperature (wasted combustion energy). Rich mixtures, on the other hand, burn faster than lean mixtures, so they need to have "the fire lit" later in the compression cycle (spark timing retarded slightly) so maximum cylinder pressure is still achieved at the same point after TDC as with the lean mixture, for maximum efficiency. The centrifugal advance system in a distributor advances spark timing purely as a function of engine rpm (irrespective of engine load or operating conditions), with the amount of advance and the rate at which it comes in determined by the weights and springs on top of the autocam mechanism. The amount of advance added by the distributor, combined with initial static timing, is "total timing" (i.e., the 34-36 degrees at high rpm that most SBC's like). Vacuum advance has absolutely nothing to do with total timing or performance, as when the throttle is opened, manifold vacuum drops essentially to zero, and the vacuum advance drops out entirely; it has no part in the "total timing" equation. At idle, the engine needs additional spark advance in order to fire that lean, diluted mixture earlier in order to develop maximum cylinder pressure at the proper point, so the vacuum advance can (connected to manifold vacuum, not "ported" vacuum - more on that aberration later) is activated by the high manifold vacuum, and adds about 15 degrees of spark advance, on top of the initial static timing setting (i.e., if your static timing is at 10 degrees, at idle it's actually around 25 degrees with the vacuum advance connected). The same thing occurs at steady-state highway cruise; the mixture is lean, takes longer to burn, the load on the engine is low, the manifold vacuum is high, so the vacuum advance is again deployed, and if you had a timing light set up so you could see the balancer as you were going down the highway, you'd see about 50 degrees advance (10 degrees initial, 20-25 degrees from the centrifugal advance, and 15 degrees from the vacuum advance) at steady-state cruise (it only takes about 40 horsepower to cruise at 50mph). When you accelerate, the mixture is instantly enriched (by the accelerator pump, power valve, etc.), burns faster, doesn't need the additional spark advance, and when the throttle plates open, manifold vacuum drops, and the vacuum advance can returns to zero, retarding the spark timing back to what is provided by the initial static timing plus the centrifugal advance provided by the distributor at that engine rpm; the vacuum advance doesn't come back into play until you back off the gas and manifold vacuum increases again as you return to steady-state cruise, when the mixture again becomes lean. The key difference is that centrifugal advance (in the distributor autocam via weights and springs) is purely rpm-sensitive; nothing changes it except changes in rpm. Vacuum advance, on the other hand, responds to engine load and rapidly-changing operating conditions, providing the correct degree of spark advance at any point in time based on engine load, to deal with both lean and rich mixture conditions. By today's terms, this was a relatively crude mechanical system, but it did a good job of optimizing engine efficiency, throttle response, fuel economy, and idle cooling, with absolutely ZERO effect on wide-open throttle performance, as vacuum advance is inoperative under wide-open throttle conditions. In modern cars with computerized engine controllers, all those sensors and the controller change both mixture and spark timing 50 to 100 times per second, and we don't even HAVE a distributor any more - it's all electronic. Now, to the widely-misunderstood manifold-vs.-ported vacuum aberration. After 30-40 years of controlling vacuum advance with full manifold vacuum, along came emissions requirements, years before catalytic converter technology had been developed, and all manner of crude band-aid systems were developed to try and reduce hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen in the exhaust stream. One of these band-aids was "ported spark", which moved the vacuum pickup orifice in the carburetor venturi from below the throttle plate (where it was exposed to full manifold vacuum at idle) to above the throttle plate, where it saw no manifold vacuum at all at idle. This meant the vacuum advance was inoperative at idle (retarding spark timing from its optimum value), and these applications also had VERY low initial static timing (usually 4 degrees or less, and some actually were set at 2 degrees AFTER TDC). This was done in order to increase exhaust gas temperature (due to "lighting the fire late") to improve the effectiveness of the "afterburning" of hydrocarbons by the air injected into the exhaust manifolds by the A.I.R. system; as a result, these engines ran like crap, and an enormous amount of wasted heat energy was transferred through the exhaust port walls into the coolant, causing them to run hot at idle - cylinder pressure fell off, engine temperatures went up, combustion efficiency went down the drain, and fuel economy went down with it. If you look at the centrifugal advance calibrations for these "ported spark, late-timed" engines, you'll see that instead of having 20 degrees of advance, they had up to 34 degrees of advance in the distributor, in order to get back to the 34-36 degrees "total timing" at high rpm wide-open throttle to get some of the performance back. The vacuum advance still worked at steady-state highway cruise (lean mixture = low emissions), but it was inoperative at idle, which caused all manner of problems - "ported vacuum" was strictly an early, pre-converter crude emissions strategy, and nothing more. What about the Harry high-school non-vacuum advance polished billet "whizbang" distributors you see in the Summit and Jeg's catalogs? They're JUNK on a street-driven car, but some people keep buying them because they're "race car" parts, so they must be "good for my car" - they're NOT. "Race cars" run at wide-open throttle, rich mixture, full load, and high rpm all the time, so they don't need a system (vacuum advance) to deal with the full range of driving conditions encountered in street operation. Anyone driving a street-driven car without manifold-connected vacuum advance is sacrificing idle cooling, throttle response, engine efficiency, and fuel economy, probably because they don't understand what vacuum advance is, how it works, and what it's for - there are lots of long-time experienced "mechanics" who don't understand the principles and operation of vacuum advance either, so they're not alone. Vacuum advance calibrations are different between stock engines and modified engines, especially if you have a lot of cam and have relatively low manifold vacuum at idle. Most stock vacuum advance cans aren’t fully-deployed until they see about 15” Hg. Manifold vacuum, so those cans don’t work very well on a modified engine; with less than 15” Hg. at a rough idle, the stock can will “dither” in and out in response to the rapidly-changing manifold vacuum, constantly varying the amount of vacuum advance, which creates an unstable idle. Modified engines with more cam that generate less than 15” Hg. of vacuum at idle need a vacuum advance can that’s fully-deployed at least 1”, preferably 2” of vacuum less than idle vacuum level so idle advance is solid and stable; the Echlin #VC-1810 advance can (about $10 at NAPA) provides the same amount of advance as the stock can (15 degrees), but is fully-deployed at only 8” of vacuum, so there is no variation in idle timing even with a stout cam. For peak engine performance, driveability, idle cooling and efficiency in a street-driven car, you need vacuum advance, connected to full manifold vacuum. Absolutely. Positively. Don't ask Summit or Jeg's about it – they don’t understand it, they're on commission, and they want to sell "race car" parts. __________________ JohnZ CRG '69 Z/28 Fathom Green

Got the trans parts swapped into the new case. I had, a few times, felt like the converter was slipping at the top end of 2nd gear, so I had the guy take a good look at all the clutches when he did the swap. Took him 2 hours and cost me $350 with the the case and parts. Very fair I thought for same day service. The 2nd gear band was indeed starting to go, so I had it replaced. The thrust bearing had also started to come apart and would have failed in short order (new one also). Not sure what would cause that to fail, but if the case hadn't cracked, the builder thought it would have taken the whole trans out soon anyways. This was a Bowtie Overdrives Stage 3 200-4r incase anyone cares. I did this swap last year and probably had a couple thousand miles on it for what it's worth. Changed out the rear pinion yoke, the threads were a bit damaged on the end from the wreck, so I needed to grind down the nicked threads to get the new nut on. I did switch to 1350 ujoints and am going to order the driveshaft from Dynotech tomorrow. They were 150 bucks cheaper than Inland and Denny's for the same thing, plus they are 2 states away vs 10. Axles are on order too....

I have the stock filter adapter tapped and pluged also, with a Melling high volume pump. I use a Fram PH25 (I think) filter. I have had no issues.

200-4R